Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

I am trying to get the national news media to feature this, and in their simplistic world, if your story does not have some kind of catchy "hook," they are not interested. That is the reason for the title. I have even been asked many times - what is your hook?

My first major teacher taught me for free for fifteen years, and he did so with love, dedication, and devotion. He did not teach me wrong.

I have Dr. Neal Peres Da Costa, Chair of the Early Music Unit, Sydney Conservatorium of Music; Dr. Clive Brown MA (Cantab), MA, DPhil (Oxon), Professor of Applied Musicology, School of Music, University of Leeds; and Dr. David Hunter, Music Librarian and Curator, Historical Music Recordings Collection Fine Arts Library, University of Texas, all of whom are world recognized authorities in historical performance practice, and all of whom have also enthusiastically endorsed the thesis in my video.

Pogorelich.
4000 Post Club Member
Registered: 12/28/08
Posts: 4581
Loc: not somewhere over the rainbow

Your Mozart example just shows somebody who plays it in a baroque style - rolling everything. If you've ever played any Bach, there's tons of that written in. Most of this is a matter of taste (especially the Chopin ballade) and matter of rubato - I'm not so sure it was a "standard practice" back then - otherwise how would you explain the music they wrote for other instruments? Their orchestral stuff, string quartets? The chords and everything seem to be "together" in there... Also how about the way these pianists played other things? Schnabel's Waldstein sonata comes up to mind. Or anything else. I don't recall Rachmaninoff ever doing that..

The Brahms 117/1... I'm not sure what you're hearing there, but all I hear is expressive occasional breaking of the bass with the melody, which was common back then, and rubato typical of that time.

But consider for a second the idea that this was actually done back then. Music, like any concept, changes with time. Our realization of it changes with time. This is why when the Ravel quartet was premiered, the quartet played a famous repeated passage with extreme slides, every time that came up. It makes today's listener cringe or laugh (as I witnessed the reaction of the audience in a lecture setting while the recording was played). Music evolves with time, and it changes. Just like our instrument has evolved and changed with time. We don't restrict ourselves by playing baroque music on clavichords, do we?

Sorry, I just really don't think you have anything to make people take you seriously.

Damon
6000 Post Club Member
Registered: 09/22/06
Posts: 6356
Loc: St. Louis area

None of my teachers ever discussed this aspect other than "tricks", if you will, to bring out the melody. I've never had a teacher criticize my decision to arpeggiate a chord. I think your premise is flawed in the sense that it presupposes something in particular is being taught that really isn't.

Mark_C
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 20004
Loc: New York

Originally Posted By: Louis Podesta

I have....

If you look up the word "incorrigible," you should recognize it well.

You have this pattern of answering things with stuff that doesn't at all address what has been said, and you've done it again. On the threads where you talked about the Schumann movement, you went one better: you disappeared completely when it was pointed out that your basic premise was simply wrong -- that it had been a failure of your ear and your eye, and (apparently) a lack of being able to take seeing that you might need to go back to a drawing board.

Your sources have nothing to do with the things that are being criticized on here, and don't help you. You cited "sources" in answer to what I said about the "hook." You don't really think they have anything to do with giving you that hook, do you? And BTW as was pointed out on one of the other threads, you also have the ability to cite sources incorrectly, and even to get the thrust of a brief quote completely backwards.

If you want to be someone who can break new ground, and who can meaningfully present and defend the ground in discussions, whether here or on TV or elsewhere, in addition to changing some of how you present it you need to let yourself have a better way of addressing what is said to you.

Good luck. You'll need plenty.

Originally Posted By: debrucey

Nobody is questioning your research....

Actually we are. He sometimes cites things that just aren't there, and he can grossly misinterpret what's there.

Regarding Rachmaninoff, actually the first composer I every heard extensively arpeggiate chords was this great artist. In my score of the 2nd Piano Concerto, I have marked many a chord, mostly occurring, but not always, on the first beat of a measure. This was taken from many hours of listening to his recording of this great work.

Further, Earl Wild's recording of this piece shows much of the same arpeggiation. Mr. Wild's knowledge of this composer's music was considered by most to be encyclopedic.

I telephoned hm at his home to ask him about his recording of the 3rd concerto, which showed cuts in the third movement. He told me that he had discussed this along with other concepts and changes regarding these concertos with the composer personally, and that they had his approval.

A good example of extensive arpeggiation of Rachmaninoff in his solo music can be found in the recording (London)"Rachmaninov Plays Rachmaninov." Starting with the "Elegie in E Flat Minor, he uses what could best be described as a wide roll. Most of the other selections illustrate the same thing.

In terms of the Brahms Op. 117 #1, I refer you to two recordings, the first of which is included in Carl Friedberg's recording "The Brahms Schumann Tradition"(Marston). With the exception of the Paganini Variations, he personally studied the entire Brahms piano repertoire under the composer.

The next is Adelina de Lara's recording included in the 6 CD box set (Pearl), "The Pupils of Clara Schumann." She was a longtime friend of Brahms and was personally coached by him when he would come to visit Madamme Schumann and her students.

Both of these great artists arpeggiate practically every single chord. And, these non-evolutionary recordings were both made in the early 1950's.

pianoloverus
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Registered: 05/29/01
Posts: 19946
Loc: New York City

As I mentioned in another thread(which I can't seem to find now), although Rachmaninov did arpeggiate chords sometimes(his Chopin Nocturne Op. 9 No.2 has many examples), I also think there were many other pieces where he didn't do any or at most did very minimal arpeggiation.

several times and hear a handful of arpeggiations in the entire piece. In the other thread I also mentioned his recording of Carnival, the Funeral March from Chopin's Sonata No.2, Bach-Rachmaninov Gavotte and others as having extremely minimal if any arpeggiation.

To my thinking and listening experience, Paderewski would be an example of a pianist who used extensive arpeggiation.

pianoloverus
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Registered: 05/29/01
Posts: 19946
Loc: New York City

Originally Posted By: Louis Podesta

pianoloverus:

First, my inference was that Rachmaninoff arpeggiated most frequently when he was playing his own stuff or his transcriptions of other composer's music.

I deliberately shy away from listing Paderewski as an example of arpeggiated playing. Accordingly, I am enclosing for your perusal You Tube links to a list of other major pianists.

I don't have any doubt about most of the pianists you listed about using arpeggiating, but I do have doubts about Rachmaninov even in his own works. In particiular, the Elegy recording I posted which you gave as an example of his use of arpeggiation seems to contain virtually none. Also his recording of the Bach-Rachmaninov Gavotte has virtually no arpgeggiation.

The roll in the Elegie is a slight more broken chord roll, whereas in the following C Sharp Major Prelude, it is a hard wide roll. At the end, he is rolling practically every chord.

Plus, for those out there who think that a piano roll piano cannot play a block chord, the last seven measures of the recording of this piece should put that myth to rest. Rachmaninoff alternates between rolled and block chords until the end.

The reason I do not recommend Paderewski is that the quality of his early recordings is very poor, and they sound clunky. Further, everyone who is an afficionado of the Modern School (German Tradition) points to these as sloppy playing. And therefore, this is the reason one should not play in this manner.

It is much better to listen to analog recordings of Rosenthal, de Lara, or Friedberg as good examples of very high quality arpeggiated playing. Also, I just recently discovered a stunningly beautiful recording of the Debussy Reverie by Harold Bauer. He premiered the Children's Corner Suite.

Finally, there is the movie recording of a very old Paderewski playing the Liszt Hungarian Rhapsody #2. It is not clunky, and there are probably only a few people on this earth today who could play it any better. And, it is with rolled chords.

pianoloverus
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Registered: 05/29/01
Posts: 19946
Loc: New York City

Originally Posted By: Louis Podesta

pianoloverus:The roll in the Elegie is a slight more broken chord roll, whereas in the following C Sharp Major Prelude, it is a hard wide roll. At the end, he is rolling practically every chord.

But my point was on the Elegy recording I posted, to my ears, he doesn't play more than a handful of arpeggiated chords in the entire piece although there are hundreds of opportunites to do so. Thus I don't see how you can say he arpeggiates chords in that piece. I'd say he plays his own Elegy in a style similar to pianists of today. Any arpeggiating, asynchronization, or rubato is so minimal as to be almost nonexistent. In my view Rachmaninov is not a good example of the style pianists often employed in the early at of the 20th century.

I like how the title accuses my teachers of not knowing what they're doing even though my teacher as far back in undergrad told me about this performance practice and we both agreed that, unlike other performance practices such as improvisation in Mozart and Bach on repeats, it's largely tedious and uninteresting.

As I mentioned in another thread(which I can't seem to find now), although Rachmaninov did arpeggiate chords sometimes(his Chopin Nocturne Op. 9 No.2 has many examples), I also think there were many other pieces where he didn't do any or at most did very minimal arpeggiation.

several times and hear a handful of arpeggiations in the entire piece. In the other thread I also mentioned his recording of Carnival, the Funeral March from Chopin's Sonata No.2, Bach-Rachmaninov Gavotte and others as having extremely minimal if any arpeggiation.

To my thinking and listening experience, Paderewski would be an example of a pianist who used extensive arpeggiation.

Quote:

But my point was on the Elegy recording I posted, to my ears, he doesn't play more than a handful of arpeggiated chords in the entire piece although there are hundreds of opportunites to do so. Thus I don't see how you can say he arpeggiates chords in that piece. I'd say he plays his own Elegy in a style similar to pianists of today. Any arpeggiating, asynchronization, or rubato is so minimal as to be almost nonexistent. In my view Rachmaninov is not a good example of the style pianists often employed in the early at of the 20th century.

I haven't had much time to answer this stuff but the entire argument is rather questionable so I didn't feel like bothering. In any case: the point being brought up is that Rach, as most other pianists of his time, DID arpeggiate and roll chords when he wanted to, it was a natural part of his musical vocabulary and he employed it whenever he wanted to. The Chopin Waltzes show tons of examples - note the the notorious Piu lento secion in op 64/2 for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Xxxbu-75fc#

The pieces you are giving as examples are quite dubious - we're talking a funeral march and a bach gavotte among other things. You won't find a common trend among early 20th century pianists of arpeggiating chords in those pieces - but while we're at that funeral march, there's a quite massive surprise waiting after the Db major section. Would a pianist today dare to re-write Chopin in such a way? As for rolled chords in that particular piece, better check the Trio section of the scherzo - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=xl7IzJ34gyM#t=65sYou'll hear some nice asynchronization and rolled chords in the 2nd theme of the op 47 ballade too - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=DzDYbIL2alE#t=132s

Clearly, Rachmaninoff was no Paderewski in these matters, and why would he be? The point is that he had this in his musical vocabulary, he made use of it, and nowadays it is practically gone. To say that "some pianists from the earlier part of the 20th century played quite closely to the style typical of today's performers" with people like Rachmaninoff in mind (which you did in another thread) is quite a statement - apart from things already mentioned there were numerous aspects of his playing that seem unthinkable today. Just imagine someone distorting Chopin's text in such a way in the funeral march today, or someone distorting the rhythm in such a way in the 3rd scherzo, in a Chopin competition today!

And as for the Elegy you keep coming back to, one doesn't need to listen further than to the 2nd melody note in search for asynchronization. Since we can follow the score in the video, I also noted quite a few things - added ornaments, doing the opposite dynamic comparing to what's written (before the piu mosso), flexible rhythmic treatment with dotted rhythms (8th-notes turning into 16ths etc), changed notes, not to mention that he DOES arpeggiate most bass octaves in the climax section. I also wonder who would agree with that his rubato is so minimal that it's almost nonexistent...

pianoloverus
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Registered: 05/29/01
Posts: 19946
Loc: New York City

Originally Posted By: fnork

Originally Posted By: pianoloverus

As I mentioned in another thread(which I can't seem to find now), although Rachmaninov did arpeggiate chords sometimes(his Chopin Nocturne Op. 9 No.2 has many examples), I also think there were many other pieces where he didn't do any or at most did very minimal arpeggiation.

several times and hear a handful of arpeggiations in the entire piece. In the other thread I also mentioned his recording of Carnival, the Funeral March from Chopin's Sonata No.2, Bach-Rachmaninov Gavotte and others as having extremely minimal if any arpeggiation.

To my thinking and listening experience, Paderewski would be an example of a pianist who used extensive arpeggiation.

Quote:

But my point was on the Elegy recording I posted, to my ears, he doesn't play more than a handful of arpeggiated chords in the entire piece although there are hundreds of opportunities to do so. Thus I don't see how you can say he arpeggiates chords in that piece. I'd say he plays his own Elegy in a style similar to pianists of today. Any arpeggiating, asynchronization, or rubato is so minimal as to be almost nonexistent. In my view Rachmaninov is not a good example of the style pianists often employed in the early at of the 20th century.

I haven't had much time to answer this stuff but the entire argument is rather questionable so I didn't feel like bothering. In any case: the point being brought up is that Rach, as most other pianists of his time, DID arpeggiate and roll chords when he wanted to, it was a natural part of his musical vocabulary and he employed it whenever he wanted to. The Chopin Waltzes show tons of examples - note the the notorious Piu lento secion in op 64/2 for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Xxxbu-75fc#

The pieces you are giving as examples are quite dubious - we're talking a funeral march and a bach gavotte among other things. You won't find a common trend among early 20th century pianists of arpeggiating chords in those pieces - but while we're at that funeral march, there's a quite massive surprise waiting after the Db major section. Would a pianist today dare to re-write Chopin in such a way? As for rolled chords in that particular piece, better check the Trio section of the scherzo - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=xl7IzJ34gyM#t=65sYou'll hear some nice asynchronization and rolled chords in the 2nd theme of the op 47 ballade too - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=DzDYbIL2alE#t=132s

Clearly, Rachmaninoff was no Paderewski in these matters, and why would he be? The point is that he had this in his musical vocabulary, he made use of it, and nowadays it is practically gone. To say that "some pianists from the earlier part of the 20th century played quite closely to the style typical of today's performers" with people like Rachmaninoff in mind (which you did in another thread) is quite a statement - apart from things already mentioned there were numerous aspects of his playing that seem unthinkable today. Just imagine someone distorting Chopin's text in such a way in the funeral march today, or someone distorting the rhythm in such a way in the 3rd scherzo, in a Chopin competition today!

And as for the Elegy you keep coming back to, one doesn't need to listen further than to the 2nd melody note in search for asynchronization. Since we can follow the score in the video, I also noted quite a few things - added ornaments, doing the opposite dynamic comparing to what's written (before the piu mosso), flexible rhythmic treatment with dotted rhythms (8th-notes turning into 16ths etc), changed notes, not to mention that he DOES arpeggiate most bass octaves in the climax section. I also wonder who would agree with that his rubato is so minimal that it's almost nonexistent...

There are some examples of rolled or aroeggiated chords(RC), asynchronizaton(A), extreme rubato(ER) in the examples you mentioned but, in general, I think few compared to many of the pianists of the early 20th century(for example most of the other recordings posted by the OP). To my ears the Elegy has virtually no RC, A or ER, the Schumann Carnival virtually none, he Bach-Rachmaninov virtually none, the middle section(or any part)of the Funeral March movement virtually none, the Chopin Waltzes only in the middle section of the C# minor out of the several waltzes, etc. The only pieces where I would agree with you about significant use of rolled chords are the Chopin D flat Nocturne and middle section of the Waltz C# minor Waltz.

I think many other pianists of his time use RC, A, and ER to an extent that makes any use of these by Rachmaninov seem rather small.

Thank you for your inciteful and very well thought out comments/analysis.

As pointed out recently by Dr. Ingrid Pearson of the Royal College Of Music, in her October journal article in "Performance Practice Review," "historical performance is now an essential component of musical training and education. Successful performers must be able to seamlessly function across the widest possible range of musical styles, accommodating an equally wide gamut of tastes, both individually and collectively."

My point in all of this is to broach this subject to not only all pianists, but also to all those in the general public who have had any experience with the piano. History throughout the world is considered one of the most important subjects that can be experienced and taught. While we in the U.S. barely know anything about the history of anything.

And, as pointed out by musicologist Dr. Charles Roeckle, former Dean Of The College Of Fine Arts UT Austin, who was my faculty advisor "If this were “old news,” one would encounter more teaching and performing that incorporated these ideas. Of course, not everyone who knows about it will support the notion."

Finally, as far as your incite into the lack of rubato by Rachmaninoff, I noticed some time ago that instead of an Earl Wild style rubato, I find that this man judicially and seamlessly made extensive use of ritards and accelerandos.

currawong
6000 Post Club Member
Registered: 05/15/07
Posts: 6025
Loc: Down Under

Originally Posted By: debrucey

The research is all well and good but 'Your Piano Teacher Taught You Wrong' is a stupid statement.

Originally Posted By: Louis Podesta

My first major teacher taught me for free for fifteen years, and he did so with love, dedication, and devotion. He did not teach me wrong.

If it doesn't apply to you, why would you assume it applies to anyone else? Change the title. Funnily enough, I think more people would examine your work with an open mind if your title did not imply that yours is closed.

pianoloverus
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Registered: 05/29/01
Posts: 19946
Loc: New York City

Originally Posted By: currawong

Originally Posted By: debrucey

The research is all well and good but 'Your Piano Teacher Taught You Wrong' is a stupid statement.

Originally Posted By: Louis Podesta

My first major teacher taught me for free for fifteen years, and he did so with love, dedication, and devotion. He did not teach me wrong.

If it doesn't apply to you, why would you assume it applies to anyone else? Change the title. Funnily enough, I think more people would examine your work with an open mind if your title did not imply that yours is closed.

He's already explained why he chose that title...he was told he needed a hook.

I think the posts on this thread have proved it's an effective hook in terms of getting attention but, as others have pointed out, I agree it has the big flaws of being not true and perhaps offensive.

A video with a different title would probably have gotten a better reaction especially on a site like PW. Also, just saying that this was a performance style of that time rather than claiming it was a better way of playing or that this information is some new discovery would be more accurate IMO.

Would a title such as "Have our piano teachers taught us wrong?" maybe be less offensive?

I remember in writing classes, teachers/professors discussed how having a title that is radical/attention grabbing is a good thing, though of course, there still is a line.

I personally don't find the title offensive as a statement like that, though it does prompt me to want to challenge in argument, instead of do original research in a less biased manner. That's how I feel.

Unrelated, one of the best titles to an article I've ever seen is "What's in Your Butt?" And the article was about cigarettes. It was an interesting read; one I would have not read if I hadn't been so hooked by the title!

[...] The point is that he had this in his musical vocabulary, he made use of it, and nowadays it is practically gone. [...]

[...] And as for the Elegy you keep coming back to, one doesn't need to listen further than to the 2nd melody note in search for asynchronization. Since we can follow the score in the video, I also noted quite a few things - added ornaments, doing the opposite dynamic comparing to what's written (before the piu mosso), flexible rhythmic treatment with dotted rhythms (8th-notes turning into 16ths etc), changed notes, not to mention that he DOES arpeggiate most bass octaves in the climax section. I also wonder who would agree with that his rubato is so minimal that it's almost nonexistent...

"Musical vocabulary." Well said, fnork! Not only do we have a vocabulary, we also have a voice, a dialect, and a STYLE! What I like about what you point out (and what I wonder if Louis is trying to get at) is that it is more important to find the music in a piece than it is to be religiously tied to the score.

That said, I think, ideally, it is critical to learn a score exactly as it is written to see what it says. I am lately of the opinion that one must wrestle with the score exactly as indicated by the engraver to make sure one understands its meaning as rendered by the editorial chain that ends at the printing press. However, I have lived most of my life as a sloppy reader, and the music still comes out--sometimes with broken chords or grace notes where none are indicated but where the spirit moves.

Perhaps our teachers taught us right, but there is room to maneuver in all of it.

First, citing one more source, which is Dr. Rigbie Turner, former Curator of Original Manuscripts at Pierpont Morgan Library, there is no one authentic Urtext score of any piece of music.

Many pieces were hand copied by students even before they went to the printer for the first time. Next, most composers made changes to what came back from the printer. Some of these have made it to today, and some have not.

Beethoven was pressured to submit his score for the 4th Piano Concerto because a representative from his publisher noticed that by following him on tour that he kept changing things around when he went from city to city.

Debussy was notorius for marking up his published scores with red, blue, and green pencil. And, returning to Beethoven, if you are fortunate enough to visit Pierpont Morgan, you will not see words like "espressivo" on any of his manuscripts. Earl Wild told me in one of our conversations that the performance style in Beethoven's time, in terms of rhythm, was to play at an even tempo, nothing like what Artur Schnabel did based on his rendering of "the score."

As stated in the video re: Dr. Kenneth Hamilton, the score was meant to be a guide. If you wanted to know how it was supposed to go, you studied the piece under the composer, or one of their teaching assistants.

So, when Maurice Hinson states that Olga Samaroff instructed him to pay meticulous attention to the score, just pull up one the extra examples listed above of her recording of the Brahms Op. 117 #2.

She learned the piece from her fellow faculty member at Julliard, Carl Friedberg, who learned it from Johnny Brahms. And, if you can find any written score of that piece which shows the extensive arpeggiation and asynchronization that she demonstrates in this rendering, then you post it on Piano World, and while you are at it call the Associated Press, because you will have made history.

Thank you, thank you, thank you "Cinnamonbear." You have discovered what very few pianists know, and that is the goal is to make music. Arpeggiation, asynchronization, rhythmic alteration, and tempo modification are the same exact techniques used by every symphony or opera conductor on earth. They would be laughed off the stage if they got up and did a literal interpretation.

Does this mean that anything goes when learning a particular work - of course not! However, once all of the wrong notes are corrected, and any improper micro-rhythms or dynamics are straightened out, then the task ahead is to have the student hear in their mind's ear what the composer heard in theirs, and then to re-create that beautiful music.

Pogorelich.
4000 Post Club Member
Registered: 12/28/08
Posts: 4581
Loc: not somewhere over the rainbow

Originally Posted By: Louis Podesta

Praise Jesus! There is intelligent life at Piano World afterall.

Yes and sadly, you are not part of it. You need to stop with this rolled chord nonsense. People will laugh at you.

You never addressed two of my points: what about the music composers wrote for other instruments? Orchestral stuff, string quartets? Should we go around every major string quartet and tell them their teachers/coaches taught them wrong? That every chord they have together has to be played sloppy, as if they can't play together? That ought to be easy enough to do! All you have to do is not listen! And what about the fact that music changes with time? You never answered that. I don't think you know what to say. Do we have to follow ancient customs even when we know they're ridiculous, just because they're ancient customs? I don't think we cut off somebody's arm for stealing anymore.................

Anyway, speaking of Beethoven and Debussy - those are two of the most severe examples of composers who wanted EVERY little detail to be followed in the score. And to not do so is not only disrespectful, but foolish as well. Bartok was very particular too, I think.